Видео

I’m convinced it was a jealous teenage relative. I grew up hating my cousins because I grew up abused and neglected but they had the big house, multiple holidays every year etc and their parents actually liked them and if I’d thought of it this definitely sounds like something I might have done to them as a teenager 😂

Jack please use more of your late night FM DJ voice 😂❤

I don't think it's that she trusts him with her feelings. It's that she is confident in her own feelings and opinions. I hate that guy.

Why would she not leave? She is lying.

❤

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DO KELSI GERMAN REGARDING THE DELPHI MURDERS!!! PLEASE! THERE'S A LOT OF MATERIAL TO WORK WITH AND MANY PPL WILL BE INTERESTED I HAVE NO DOUBT. THANK YOU! HUGE FAN

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DO KELSI GERMAN REGARDING THE DELPHI MURDERS!!! PLEASE! THERE'S A LOT OF MATERIAL TO WORK WITH AND MANY PPL WILL BE INTERESTED I HAVE NO DOUBT. THANK YOU! HUGE FAN

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DO KELSI GERMAN REGARDING THE DELPHI MURDERS!!! PLEASE! THERE'S A LOT OF MATERIAL TO WORK WITH AND MANY PPL WILL BE INTERESTED I HAVE NO DOUBT. THANK YOU! HUGE FAN

❤ for your algorithm.

I remember when this happened and everything that happened after. I also read her book. I still am not convinced of guilt or non-guilt. I am looking forward to your part 2.

Sorry if this comments multiple times but it kept glitching. I wonder if we’re meant to be distracted by Filomena’s room as the speech keeps going back there. Was it staged to make it look like a break in and the phones tossed to bring the police/ others to the house to make the discovery but it was taking too long? Also the medicinally clean house mate seemed to be irritating to her. Made me think about the room. If it was so clean would it make evidence easier to find/ easier to link to the stager/ perpetrator and was the faeces kept to link someone else to the house? I think Meredith’s room looked from the inside only and that’s why she was expected to be in there. Also I think they seemed to live separate lives and treated their individual rooms as apartments. But I would be interested to hear accounts of other people who lived in the house/ visitors.

It never made sense that Patsy made the call. Why not John who was always much calmer and took the lead in all their interviews.

Thanks for covering this case, Jack. Your linguistic analysis is excellent and incredibly insightful. I’m so frustrated by the media referring to her as an "exoneree" thanks to her father’s one-million-dollar PR machine and their team of spin doctors. The Supreme Court that released her for political reasons clearly stated that she was at the crime scene, that she washed Meredith’s blood off her hands and feet, and that the evidence indicated the crime involved two knives and multiple perpetrators. One of the knives was found in Raffaele’s apartment. We're expected to believe the murderer stole it and then returned it to the knife block. This knife had Amanda’s DNA on the handle and Meredith’s blood on the blade. Raffaele tried to explain away the evidence by claiming he accidentally pricked Meredith when she visited his apartment. The problem is, Meredith had never been to Raffaele’s apartment. The fact that he made up that story is very telling. In my opinion, that insufferable fraud took the life of a beautiful young woman with her whole life ahead of her. Now, Amanda has made millions from playing the victim. Yet, she refuses to pay Patrick Lumumba-the man she falsely accused of Meredith’s murder-the compensation mandated by the Court following her conviction for criminal slander. She let Lumumba sit in jail for two weeks until he was cleared by a solid alibi. But Amanda was content to let an innocent man take the fall for this murder. Meanwhile, she waxes poetic about the plight of the falsely accused. The Joe Rogan interview with Amanda Knox might be an interesting dialogue to analyse, but it's a 3-hour marathon. A more concise 30-minute video might be more suitable: "By Request - My Reaction to Amanda Knox on Joe Rogan’s Podcast - True Crimes," if you’re interested. Thanks again Jack! Looking forward to the next video.

I’ll share a few notes I made after watching your thought-provoking analysis of her own words, in case anyone is interested. 1. She frequently uses the words “thought,” “thinking,” or “assumed” because she’s trying, in vain, to explain why her supposed thought processes-given the circumstances-were so drastically different from what any reasonable, rational person (even a half-wit) would have thought in the same situation. She keeps insisting everything looked "completely normal," which seems like a need to persuade. You made a great point about her saying “ALSO like a 1st.” Perhaps ALSO, it was the first time she saw the door wide open, but notably, she didn't flag that as an issue. You’re right Jack, she told her family in an email that she went back to her place to take a shower. But why would she do that when, according to her own testimony, the shower at her boyfriend's place was working perfectly fine? She says, “When I first went in, it was very strange to me”-an open door, blood, feces, an empty house-yet she proceeded to get vulnerable and take a shower. This is baffling. “The blood in the bathroom… not a lot, so I didn’t assume someone had been murdered”- nobody sees a small amount of blood and assumes murder. Imo this is contempt. It's a sneering mockery towards her critics who find it far-fetched that she could miss so many red flags. Meanwhile, her own account shows that both Raffaele and Filomena were immediately alarmed upon noticing the same "very strange" yet "completely normal" details she supposedly dismissed without taking reasonable action.

2. "I didn’t know" Laura was in Rome (she's telling us what she didn’t know, perhaps a need to persuade). But Filomena "confirmed" that to me. The word "confirm" is typically used when we already know or suspect something, and then it is “confirmed”, not when we’re completely unaware of it.

3. Regarding her linguistic fixation on cleanliness and filth, I've noticed from watching True Crime that murderers often use language related to cleaning when talking after the event-words like shower, cleaning, mopping, water, laundry, etc. One explanation would be the obvious need to clean up the crime scene to avoid culpability, which then spills into their language. Also, perhaps guilt. "A little water clears us of this deed." "Will all great Neptune's ocean wash this blood clean from my hand?" - Macbeth. Additionally, Meredith’s friend reported to the police that Meredith had mentioned to both her friend and her father that she had an issue with Amanda not flushing the toilet after using it, even during her period. Her friend also mentioned Amanda frequently using the word "shit" and how she presumed that the blood in their shared bathroom was menstrual blood. But Amanda knew Meredith to be clean, hence her continued objections to Amanda’s filthy habits. So, whose menstrual blood did Amanda think it was? Because Filomena and Laura were not at the house the previous night and they had their own bathroom. She mentioned carrying a mop across town-really? Who does that? Couldn’t she find a towel in her boyfriend’s apartment to wring out? I’m curious about what Raffaele used when he got out of the shower.

4. "I did not (No contraction) think there’s been a break-in." Again, she’s telling us what she didn’t think, perhaps a need to persuade. But she repeatedly mentions a "break-in," which might also be an attempt to convince us that there was one, when in reality, the police stated that the "break-in" was staged. The phrase "ruffled up" seems to be the kind of language you’d use if you were staging a break-in. You would ruffle things to make it look like a burglar had been through the place. Interestingly, the glass from the broken window was found on top of the "ruffled-up" items. Go figure! Obviously, only someone living in the apartment would have the motive to stage a break-in in order to divert suspicion from those who actually lived there. Tragically, Meredith wasn’t alive, and both Laura and Filomena were away on the night of the murder, leaving only one person with the motive to go to such lengths.

5. "I wasn’t able to, like, try to understand… I do not (no contraction) know how to make sense of this." Where’s the confusion, Amanda? An open door, blood, strange feces, a broken window, a ransacked room, and Meredith’s whereabouts are unknown. "I didn’t see anything taken." So, then if nothing was taken, maybe it wasn’t a burglary. In that case, what other motive might someone have for breaking in? Perhaps it’s something far worse than a burglary. Meredith is unaccounted for-maybe it’s an abduction, an assault, or even murder. Why does she have absolutely NO IDEA what might have happened? Why is it soo confusing for her? "I didn’t know who to call." How about the police?! "I didn’t know the number." Try asking your Italian boyfriend or any other Italian in the neighbourhood! In fact, neither of them called the police until AFTER the postal police arrived unexpectedly. They had traced Meredith's discarded phone to the apartment and found both of them loitering at the crime scene. Raffaele then snuck away to call the police.

6. "It’s not like we were the type of house where you had to worry about people going into each other’s rooms." Need to persuade? Because Rudy Guede, who was convicted as an accomplice in Meredith’s murder, said that the murder started after a fight over Amanda stealing Meredith’s rent money to feed her drug habit. So, perhaps there should have been a reason to worry about someone -AKA Amanda-going into other people’s rooms. Amanda told the postal police that it wasn’t unusual for Meredith’s door to be locked, but when Filomena arrived, she insisted that Meredith NEVER locked her door and demanded it be broken down! Why the persistent reluctance from Amanda to grow a brain, figure out the obvious, and get passed the locked door?

I always felt someone wanted her dead before their Disney trip which was just a couple of days away. i feel like the timing was weird. Did her husband want her dead before the trip. Someone he was seeing didn't want them going on the trip? I still feel the trip had something to do with the timing

There is ZERO chance her husband isn't involved. His weird behavior, changing stories, The murder happened minutes after he left the House. No one knew she was going to be out there. Less then 2 years after her murder he was already remarried. The fact that the first name he through under the bus was his fathers? Almost in a panic I don't care that he didn't collect the insurance money. Ill be he knows EXACTLY when it will be too late for him to collect, and he will get it then. He can't recall how many lie detectors he took? He had to think about it? He was 'Told' he passed. There is no way hes not involved. Just because the police have not found a connection does not mean it isn't there.

Dude you are doing more reaching than Jane Fonda in an aerobics class. Law enforcement knows full well who did this. The individual was involved in their volunteer work.

Love this analysis. Almost everyone knows the note is odd and off, but you breakdown so well just why it is odd. Any "normal" kidnapper says "Meet me here, at this time, with this amount of money." But this exhausting, step-by-step account of how the money will be gotten is , yes, from the money-getter's perspective rather than the money-receiver's. I never thought of it that way but it makes so much sense!

For an innocent person, when the police start asking how much dinner you had, you surely get really irate because it's irrelevant to the wellbeing of your loved one. In what world does counting pizza slices help find Laci?? Only the world in which the detective is suspicious and Scott is showing compliance and honesty and happy to tell you all about his dinne. 45:00

He thinks that Amber is "irrelevant" but the number one reason for Laci taking off of her own will would be that she discovered the affair. Thats obvious, and the questions about Amber would be a perfect opportunity for an innocent man to give a message of apology for his stupidity etc.

I really like your analysis and attention to details. So interesting to exclude mannerisms, looks and body language to focus on a person's words only. Very enlightening! I've always been confused when she said the plainclothes cops arrived looking for Filomena and had Filomena's phone. (Yet Filomena was on her way because Amanda had just called her on her phone.) Then she mentions the cops had "these two phones." And then she says the phones (plural) were identified as Meredith's. Would either Filomena or Meredith have two phones? If Amanda had just been calling each/either of them, wouldn't the cops have had the phone(s) in hand and answered (as one does if one finds a phone and expects the owner to be calling to locate it)? Was there one phone tossed in the neighbor's yard or two? It's just one of many confusing details, for me.

Does it say who took her? Patsy “No!” How would she know when she stated she never picked up the note and had never read it completely

The ransom note is very theatrical. My theory is Patsy and John had no idea how to actually write one, so they took pieces out of movies they'd seen and used it to compose the letter. I think they somehow thought this would ssem realistic. But movies aren't real life. The sad thing is as ridiculous as this ransom letter is, no one has ever been charged for Jonbenet's murder. She deserves justice.

I always thought it strange that she didn’t flush the toilet or clean up the blood. Seems odd passive aggression towards roommates. It is like cleaning up after a friend has a wild night out and gets sick. You know they’re not feeling well so you take care of it.

Couldn’t stay for the entire premiere so watching from the beginning now. So excited for your analysis! Thank you!!!

Americans seem to mix up clean and tidy. I've noticed a lot will say a room is dirty when it is actually just untidy.

Will this case ever be solved????

Fascinating about the cleanliness and dirt in this… how she didn’t mention her shower. As for body language red flags galore when she glossed over and backtracked about bringing the mop to R’s house. Eye blocking very prominent

Could you please have a look at the interviews with the foster father of Billie Jo Jenkins? She was brutally murdered at age 13 in February 1997. Her stepfather, Siôn Jenkins was convicted of her murder and spent 6 years in prison before the conviction was overturned and he was released. There are a few interviews with him available online. I'd love to hear your take on what he says. Thanks.

Really interesting analysis. I'm not very familiar with this case, but a few things stood out to me: 1. I do think brooding was the right word to use. She was waiting for her boyfriend to get out of the shower and couldn't alleviate the worry tickling the back of her head until she could talk to him, so that suggests being a bit pent up and troubled HOWEVER... 2. Why did she go into more than one bathroom when she went home? If I was going back home for something before going straight out again (was it to collect a mop?) I would get what I came for and leave again, but also... if I was disturbed enough by the open door (and I probably would be) then I'd either leave and get my boyfriend straight away or I would search the house fully. I wouldn't randomly go to two different bathrooms then leave again. Because she doesn't mention the detail of the bedrooms and the broken window until she goes back with Raffaele, does she? 3. A huge red flag for me: describing Laura's room as "wonderfully" clean. Nothing about this situation is wonderful, and that word really pops out at me as out of place. I agree it seems she has a thing about Laura and cleanliness and it makes me wonder if that was a point of contention between them, which makes it all the stranger that the bathroom she found the faeces in was the one Laura used. An odd detail. 4. The use of the word "indeed" is really bothering me. It's very formal. It's a word academics use to try to sound smarter and, more importantly perhaps, to try to convince their audience that one concept follows another in a vein similar to the use of "of course", or "obviously". As someone who is very wordy and literary myself, I only ever use "indeed" if I'm grandstanding, so it stuck out to me as something that really didn't fit here... 5. I am bothered by the little laughs she keeps doing. They're conversational laughs, ingratiating laughs, and they also stick out in a really odd way when they're discussing what should have been an extremely traumatic event. Traumatic firstly because murder is inherently traumatic, especially when it's in such close proximity, but also because she was then arrested and charged with the murder. I could never again laugh when describing that situation if it were me. I don't know. Just some thoughts. I don't know any of the details so maybe I've got a few presuppositions wrong when listening here, but I spent most of the video frowning as more things stood out as odd, which I don't usually do when watching your videos.

Love your show!

Scatalogical and exhausting, but well done. Q: Why were - like - the police - like the last to be - like contacted - like, if she was so - like - "freaked out"?